Space Weather Effects in the Ring Current
Natalia Ganushkina
(1) Finnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, Finland (2) University of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI, USA
The research leading to these results was partly funded by the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement No 606716 SPACESTORM and by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 637302 PROGRESS
ISSI Workshop “The scientific foundations of space weather”, June 27-July 1, 2016, Bern, Switzerland General structure of ring current
The symmetric ring current is one of the oldest concepts in magnetospheric physics: A current of a ring shape flowing around the Earth was first introduced by Stormer (1907) and supported by Schmidt (1917). Chapman and Ferraro (1931, 1941) used a ring current concept for the model of a geomagnetic storm.
Ring current, simplified view: - toroidal shaped electric current - flowing westward around the Earth - with variable density - at geocentric distances between 2 and 9 Re. - H+, O+, He+, e, 1-400 keV
Quiet time ring current: of ~1-4 nA/m2 Storm time ring current: of ~7 nA/m2
The first mission, which clarified the ring current energy and composition was AMPTE mission of the late 1980s. General structure of ring current: Observations
There have been numerous in-situ observations of the ring current: - particles measurements giving plasma pressure and current estimated from it (Frank, 1967; Smith and Hoffman,1973; Lui et al., 1987; Spence et al., 1989; Lui and Hamilton (1992); De Michelis et al., 1997; Milillo et al., 2003; Korth et al., 2000; Ebihara et al., 2002; Lui, 2003);
- deriving the current from the magnetic field measurements (Le et al., 2004; Vallat et al., 2005; Ohtani et al., 2007);
- remote sensing of energetic neutral atoms (ENAs) emitted from the ring current (information about ring current morphology, dynamics and composition) (Roelof , 1987; Pollock et al., 2001; Mitchell et al., 2003; Brandt et al., 2002a; Buzulukova et al., 2010; Goldstein et al., 2012). Ring current morphology
The ring current almost always is not a ring. The concept of the partial ring current and its closure to the ionosphere was early suggested by Alfven in 1950’s.
• Magnetosphere is essentially asymmetric, compressed by the solar wind dynamic pressure on the dayside, and stretched by the tail current on the night-side. • Plasma pressure distribution during disturbed times becomes highly asymmetric due to plasma transport and injection from the night-side plasma sheet to the inner magnetosphere. Current systems associated with • The resulting plasma distribution presents a gradient the partial ring current as deduced in the azimuthal direction resulting in the spatial from the ENA measurements asymmetry of the ring current. (Brandt et al., 2008) The remnant of the perpendicular current must flow along a field line to complete a closure of the current Ground effects from the ring current
It has long been known that the horizontal component, H, of the geomagnetic field is depressed during periods of great magnetic disturbances and that the recovery to its average level is gradual.
1741: Celsius observed large magnetic disturbance in Uppsala Graham observed the same in London simultaneously
These large magnetic field disturbances were called “magnetic storms”, they showed to be non-local. Gauss and Weber founded a network of observatories expanded by British and Russians, it was found that magnetic storms are worldwide phenomena.
Akasofu and Chapman, (1961); Kamide and Fukushima (1971); Kamide (1974): Ring current is a measure of the ground disturbance of the magnetic field. Sugiura (1964), Iyemori (1990): : The averaged magnetic field depression observed at low latitudes is used to derive the Dst index. General definition of the effects of space weather Where does the ring current come in?
Time-varying conditions in the space environment that may – be hazardous to technological systems in space or on ground – endanger human health or life Dst index Where can we get the modeled Dst index?
1. From physics-based (and semi-empirical) models, which include current systems Global magnetospheric magnetic field models like Tsyganenko models MHD models (with inner magnetosphere represented) like SWMF Kinetic models like our own IMPTAM
2. From linear (or nonlinear) prediction filter based on solar wind parameters alone (Burton et al., 1975; Fenrich and Luhmann, 1998; Vassiliadis et al., 1999; O'Brien and McPherron, 2000; Lundstedt et al., 2001; Watanabe et al., 2002; Temerin and Li, 2006; Boynton et al., 2011). Dst index is not a measure of the ring current only From semi-empirical global magnetospheric magnetic field models
Magnetic field measured on the ground contains contributions from all current systems, No other way to separate them but to use magnetospheric models.
Other current systems’ contributions (significant or largest) during main phase: - cross-tail current (Alexeev et al., 1996; Dremukhina et al., 1999; Turner et al., 2000; Alexeev et al., 2001; Ohtani et al., 2001; Maltsev, 2004; Ganushkina et al., 2004; Kalegaev et al., 2005)
- partial ring current (Liemohn et al., 2001; Liemohn, 2003)
- substorm current wedge (Friedrich et al., 1999; Munsami , 2000) Moderate storm: Current density initial November 6-7, 1997 40 10 mp
9 2
m 8
0 / A
rc n 7
,
y
T
t i
n 6
s ,
t -40
n s
e 5
D d
tc
t 4
n e
-80 r
r 3 u c 2 -120 1 18 20 22 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 0 UT main recovery 1 recovery 2
Event-oriented magnetic field model, From Ganushkina et al., AnnGeo, 2010 Intense storm: Current density
initial October 21-23, 1999 100
50 mp
0 rc
T tc
n
,
t -50
s D -100
-150
-200 18 0 6 12 18 0 6 12 UT
main 1 main 2 recovery
Event-oriented magnetic field model, From Ganushkina et al., AnnGeo, 2010 Inner Magnetosphere Particle Transport and Acceleration Model
boundary conditions: RC and RB model sources: plasma sheet SW, Grid: 2–10 Re, all MLT ionosphere initial distribution E=100 eV – 10 MeV PA= 0º – 90º losses charge exchange Species: H+, e, He+, He++, O+ Coulomb collisions atmospheric loss electric Fields large-scale w-p interactions electric escape from MP inductive transport convection magnetic Magnetic under inductive fields large-scale inductive radial and PA diffusion
Plasmasphere model ionosphere/thermosphere Formation of storm-time ring current: Convection vs substorms Drivers of inner magnetosphere
Relative importance of large-scale convection and substorm-associated electric fields for ring current development is still an open issue
- Storms as superposition of substorms (Chapman, 1962; Akasofu, 1966);
- Substorm occurrence is incidental to storm main phase (Kamide, 1992);
- Convection paradigm (Takahashi et al., 1990; Kozyra et al., 1998; Ebihara and Ejiri, 2000; Jordanova et al., 2001; Liemohn et al., 2001);
- Concurrent action of convection and substorm-associated field variations (Fok et al., 1999; Ganushkina et al., 2005)
Accurate representation of substorm-associated fields is missing Ring current development during storm on May 2-4, 1998: IMPTAM simulations (Ganushkina et al., 2005) Model-dependent Dst calculations during storms 1. Using Dessler-Parker-Sckopke relationship: B 2 W The energy in the ring current can be expressed by RC k ˆ , where B 3 W 4 E mag W B2 R 3 is the total energy in the Earth’s dipole magnetic field above mag 3 E E 0 the surface, BE is the magnetic field at the Earth’s surface, RE is one Earth radii (6371 km). B is the change in B measured at the surface of the Earth (Dst).
2. Calculating from the model ring current by Biot-Savart law:
The magnetic disturbance parallel to the earth’s dipole at the center of the earth
B induced by the azimuthal component of J, is given by
B 0 cos2 J r,,drdd 4 r B PII P j P B B B2 B2 Dst index is not a measure of the ring current only From kinetic inner magnetosphere models
kappa at 6.6 Re, n, T|| and Tfrom LANL
Dipole T89 T96 TS04 Dst_obs
kappa at 10 Re, T and n from Tsyganenko and Mukai (2003)
From Ganushkina et al., AnnGeo, 2012 Near-Earth tail current is important and must be considered
1. Change the boundary position from 6.6 Re to 10 Re: further decrease of modeled Dst
Time-dependent model boundary outside of 6.6 RE allows to take into account the particles in the transition region (between dipole and stretched field lines) forming a partial ring current and near-Earth tail current in that region.
2.Method of Dst calculation: DPS and Bio-Savart approach give close values for dipole magnetic field but can differ of about 50 -100 nT for realistic magnetic field
Calculating the model Dst* by Biot-Savart’s law instead of the widely used Dessler- Parker-Sckopke (DPS) relation gives larger and more realistic values, since the contribution of the near-Earth tail current can be present. Disturbances of ground magnetic field and indices calculated at low latitudes as space weather proxies
Disturbances of the magnetic field in space and on the ground are due to external current systems, which are, their turn, due to solar-wind-magnetosphere interactions. Separate ground-based stations can “feel” variations of current systems differently, indices (Dst, SYM-H, ASY-H) contain averaged patterns.
To model and to predict these disturbances is to predict ground effects of space weather.
Main challenge: to be able to predict ring current effects (and effects from other current systems) on the ground as one of the space weather proxies, we need predictions of IMF and solar wind parameters, days in advance.
Therefore: End users (whoever they are) of our scientific efforts will not be interested in Dst or magnetic field variations at ground-based stations given by physics-based models.
At present, prediction filters-kind of models will be of interest, since they can give an exact (though, not correct, may be) number at some time moments in a future. General definition of the effects of space weather Where does the ring current come in?
Time-varying conditions in the space environment that may – be hazardous to technological systems in space or on ground – endanger human health or life
Ring current is not only ions but also electrons keV electrons for surface charging Why are we interested in low energy electrons (< 200 keV) in the inner magnetosphere?
• Surface charging by electrons with < 100 keV can cause significant damage and spacecraft anomalies (Whipple, 1981; Garrett, 1981; Purvis et al., 1984; Frezet et al., 1988; Koons et al., 1999; Hoeber et al., 1998; Davis et al., 2008).
• The distribution of low energy electrons, the seed population (10 to few hundreds of keV), is critically important for radiation belt dynamics (Horne et al., 2005; Chen et al., 2007)
• Chorus emissions (intense whistler mode waves) excited in the low‐density region outside the plasmapause are associated with the injection of keV plasma sheet electrons into the inner magnetosphere. (Kennel and Petschek, 1966; Kennel and Thorne, 1967; Tsurutani and Smith, 1974 ; Li et al., 2008, 2012; Meredith et al., 2001).
• The electron flux at the keV energies is largely determined by convective (Korth et al., 1999; Friedel et al., 2001; Thomsen et al., 2002; Elkington et al., 2004; Miyoshi et al., 2006; Kurita et al., 2011) and substorm-associated (Vakulin et al., 1988; Grafodatskiy et al., 1987; Degtyarev et al., 1990; Fok et al., 2001; Khazanov et al., 2004; Kozelova et al., 2006; Ganushkina et al., 2013) electric fields and varies significantly with geomagnetic activity driven by the solar wind – variations on time scales of minutes! No averaging over an hour/day/orbit! Space weather is more than storms as was said by Louis Lanzerotti Surface charging events vs. geomagnetic conditions
It is NOT necessary to have even a moderate storm for significant surface charging event to happen
The keV electron flux is largely determined by convective and substorm-associated electric fields and varies significantly with geomagnetic activity – variations on time scales of minutes! No averaging over an hour/day/orbit!
Correct models for electromagnetic fields, Matéo Vélez et al., Severe geostationary boundary conditions, losses are environments: from flight data to numerical extremely hard to develop estimation of spacecraft surface charging, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, 2016. keV electrons in real time online (IMPTAM model)
IMPTAM database
prepare to plot
imptam.fmi.fi http://fp7-spacecast.eu http://csem.engin.umich.edu/tools/imptam/ IMPTAM compared IMPTAM: traces electrons (< 200 keV) with arbitrary pitch angles (drift approximation) from to GOES MAGED the plasma sheet to the inner L-shells in time- dependent magnetic and electric fields 40 keV e- fluxes Taken into account: radial diffusion and electron losses as convection outflow and pitch angle diffusion by the electron lifetimes
GEO
MEO
Ganushkina, et al., Space Weather, 2015. Ganushkina et al., J. Geophys. Res., 2014. Ganushkina, et al., J. Geophys. Res., 2013. IMPTAM e- flux at MEO as input to SPIS, the Spacecraft Plasma Interaction System Software toolkit for spacecraft-plasma interactions and spacecraft charging modelling. http://dev.spis.org/projects/spine/home/spis
From presentation at SCTC 2016, April 4-8, Noordwijk, The Netherlands: “From GEO/LEO environment data to the numerical estimation of spacecraft surface charging at MEO” by J.C. Mateo-Velez This is what end-users want: Traffic light